Sorry for the double post, but this comment deserves more props than I've given it:

Originally posted by Brett Infiniti is rebuilding their whole image around a great V-6, so if the engine is right, the configuration is moot.

You are right.

But prejudice against Cadillac as a domestic brand means their V6 would have to be spectacular to get any respect for the car wrapped around it. And the specs on GM's high-feature V6 are merely adequate at this point. They would have an easier time getting attention (and sales) with a more prestigious configuration.

Cadillac understood this when they built their V8 with DOHC heads, and the coming V12 certainly shows understanding of the high end. I suppose limited engineering resources dictate that CTS remain adequate. But I fantasize about that V12 being sliced the other way, and I fantasize about XV8-powered rear-drive sedans. I fantasize about Jesse Jane in a tub of chocolate syrup too, but I doubt anyone wants to read about that here.

Originally posted by Brett
Really my only gripe i have with you, is that you impuned the engine originally only because it was a V6. When you and I both know that there are good V6's out there.

Not just because it's a V6. Because it's a V6, and its specs and GM's position on it already color it as average in a field of excellence. An alternate engine configuration can provide distinction that transcends performance stats. Subaru, Porsche, VW, Ducati, and Harley-Davidson all benefit from this. As does BMW.

Besides, it chaps my ass that kids today drool over a 186hp BMW econobox as a performance car and I'd like to see Cadillac shove that inline-six superiority complex right up those haughty Germans' hineys.

kcnewell
Right on target. No V8 no sale. I dont think caddi will undermine the reputation of their premium line of seville though. I do think however they are trying to put the consumers on the spot. No STS for 2004, easy way to get rid of overstocked 2003s. I dont think we are at the end of the STS. They may have something tricky up their sleeves LETS hope so.

OH one more thing,
Speaking on behalf of gm's 6 cyl.s does anyone remeber the good old GRAND NATIONAL with the 3.8L turbocharged V6. I do recall that being on the of fastest most dependable engines on the market. A leader ahead of its time for sure. 1984 to 1987. Shoot the grandnational ran a better quatermile time with the A/C on go figure. Just wanted to throw that one out there.

My God, you guys have covered a lot of ground on this GM V6 issue.Point 1. First of all let me say that even though a V6 CAN be built properly, and CAN be both durable AND powerful, the layout is flawed from the get-go. A V6 is a lousy design to start with and it must overcome many issues just to be on par with a V8.Point 2. Can GM build a "World-Class" high performance V6? Hell yeah, you only need to look as far as open-wheel racing to find it too. The two main engines for several years have been from Infiniti and Oldsmobile. GM HAS proven it's V6 thoroughly.Point 3. What about the Grand National's 3.8? Sure it was powerful, but it had a VERY short lifespan because of it's output. Average lifespan was 60K miles. So even though it was a hell of an attention getter for GM, I think in the long-run it only proves that if you want to BAD enough, you can even make a V6 a powerhouse.

V6 design is inherently unbalanced...just look at the cranks. offset journals etc.. V8 is configured correctly and requires little to get within 1 gram on balance. V6 was a costly loser in NASCAR racing...V8 rules.
No Buick or Chevy V6 ever came close to old relaiable SB Chev...
Period

Originally posted by ljklaiber V6 design is inherently unbalanced...just look at the cranks. offset journals etc.. V8 is configured correctly and requires little to get within 1 gram on balance. V6 was a costly loser in NASCAR racing...V8 rules.
No Buick or Chevy V6 ever came close to old relaiable SB Chev...
Period

What???
No doubt I would rather own a SB chevy than an old V6 but the 3.8 V6 has proven itself. Not only in the Grand National or any other application with the 3800 engine. If you dont think that engine was balanced or the cranks were made poorly then you obviously didnt realize they still produce these motors today with very little problems. Chevy has had their blunders though like the 2.8L V6 or the 3.1 same motor same problems. But all in all chevy as a whole makes very good v6 motors.